In ancient Rome, I believe, women of above average corpulence were cosidered more beautiful. As were men of below average endowment. Vinod, don't let us change the topic :)

the paucity of afore mentioned desi gals in miniskirts where i live makes desi legs in stilletos a sight for sore eyes... they seem to be not as cellulite laden... in my humble opinion the puerto ricanas have it all!

wow, that's not racist at all!

Oh man, I found this book about Robert Clive in a used bookstore here in Chicago called "The Rape of India". It is basically a history of Clive and the colonization of India as though it were told by that "know what I mean?" guy from Monty Python. I have no idea how accurate any of it is, but the whole book is told in a manner barely more "literary" than pornography. It is fucking hilarious.

oh. my. god. becky. just look at her butt!

In one of his Home Letters Written from India (mainly dating from the 1830s) Samuel Snead Brown observed that ‘those who have lived with a native woman for any length of time never marry a European… so amusingly playful, so anxious to oblige and please [are they], that a person after being accustomed to their society shrinks from the idea of encountering the whims or yielding to the fancies of an English-woman’ [Empire, pg 134]

This bit, I think it was about advanced bathing techniques in Desh really.

wow, that's not racist at all!
Niall Ferguson racist? Oh no! Such a fine gentleman with all these wonderful ideas. Check out his actual proposals on what to do in Iraq in this article entitled Cowboys and Indians" :

Rather, it is time to acknowledge just how thinly stretched American forces in Iraq are and to address the problem: whether by finding new allies (send Condoleezza Rice to New Delhi?);
Borderline racist.
radically expanding the accelerated citizenship program for immigrants who join the army;
Borderline racist.
or lowering the (historically high) educational requirements demanded by military recruiters.
Borderline racist.

William Dalrymple did a pretty thorough job on the late 18thC. to early 19th C. change of Prime Directive in White Mughals.

greek prostitutions would pad their asses.

I assumed the "wow it's not racist" was directed at the colonial commentary and the PR comment (#2)

greek prostitutions would pad their asses.

Well, she's just sticking hers out in a "playful" way.

For a second there, I really wanted to move to Chicago.. because it had funky-sounding bookstores like "The Rape of India".. until I read that line again.

Oh man, I found this book about Robert Clive in a used bookstore here in Chicago called "The Rape of India"

Aakashwaani:
Amazon Ships.
Stay in Iowa.

Vinod,
I understand that some of the posts here are done for fun. But you do have some intellectual inclinations. So in the interest of pure debate, I would like to point you to "Amartya Sen, 'The Argumentative Indian'". I believe this to be a truly balanced book about the way West(britain among other carpetbaggers) has plundered(a lot) and enriched( mainly in the interest of looting further) the Indian subcontinent.
I know this is probably a semi knee jerk reaction, But when some one talks about colonialism being good for anyone, I would have to say People need it like a hole in their head !
-Raj

Well he is right about the lower half. Desi legs are fugly. Ditto for african legs.

East Asian gals consistently have the cutest legs. Followed by europeans.

Methinks thats why the euro colonials adopted leg revealing attire: skirts for women, short pants for men etc. To taunt the natives with their superior calves. :)

I assumed the "wow it's not racist" was directed at the colonial commentary and the PR comment (#2)
Don't you mean Vinod's colonial commentary? I specifically want to avoid upsetting people on this blog, so I chose instead to say obliquely that the *references* may sound somewhat racist to some people.

Let me call into question two assumptions in the post : first, what was Captain Smith's research methodology? To what extent do his "findings" have bearing on the proportions of Indian women today as opposed to, say, cultural "assumptions" about Indian women in the 19th century? To be sure, Niall Ferguson is likely using the Smith reference to reflect the 19th century *British* perception of Indian women. These may well be the right quotations to use in that context, but I would not use these quotations in today's context because, as I mentioned in comment #1, different *cultures* view beauty differently (and it has nothing to do with race itself). For instance, in the Indian context, as Amrita points out, Madhuri's pose may be viewed quite differently than it would in the American context. I could question what possible measurements Captain Smith may have undertaken to arrive at his conclusions, but I wouldn't bother to because he probably didn't have a serious enough methodology to even deserve much analysis. You couldn't say that so easily about the, ummm..., other survey.

Second, I would ask if it is fair to question the motivations of an Indian-American if he chooses to marry a girl from India (in the context of the quote 'so amusingly playful, so anxious to oblige and please [are they]'). From what I have seen, dudes choose to marry educated, highly educated ones at that, Indian girls. Perhaps, we should base the discussion on Enlightenment values, as opposed to values specific to specific cultures (such as greater or less independence and greater or lesser family values), such as the American or the Indian. I would argue that educated Indian girls are just as much a product of Englightment values as American ones. It seems to me that the opinions of Brown are about Indian girls from the 19th century, and not about those that have been through a board of education ;)

This is the most subversive post in the entire history of sepia mutiny. Vinod is a very very clever lad indeed.

Well he is right about the lower half. Desi legs are fugly. Ditto for african legs.

East Asian gals consistently have the cutest legs. Followed by europeans.

You and I clearly live on different planets.

Well he is right about the lower half. Desi legs are fugly.

(and, FWIW, before I get my ass handed to me here, lemme just say that desi men - for whatever reason - almost always have a "pre-uncle" belly -- desi gals way 'outperform' dudes here)

You and I clearly live on different planets.

ennis bro, i'm with you. east asian women have the 'fat calf' problem which results in a lot of surgery in japan. african americans (if they aren't obese) often have elegantly shaply legs. the african american male physique when optimized can be appollonian in its classical perfection.

cite:
Dr. Suh In Seock, a surgeon in Seoul, has struggled to find the best way to fix an affliction the Koreans call muu-dari and the Japanese call daikon-ashi: radish-shaped calves.

we gotz a radish lover in the house!

In response to #10 an observation or for that matter a preference does not imply the prejudice or discrimination entailed in racism... i'm an equal opportunity friend :)

it's truly rare to see a desi gal who can rock a miniskirt

I strongly disagree. I think desi "gals" look great in miniskirts ... in fact, I think they should wear them more often. With tall, high-heeled boots.

;-)

I strongly disagree. I think desi "gals" look great in miniskirts ... in fact, I think they should wear them more often. With tall, high-heeled boots.
I haven't seen a whole lot of 'em in mini-skirts, but I gotta agree with that. As regards Madhuri Dixit and so forth, it ain't so much that the Ghee and rice don't miss Ms. Dixit as much as the fact that she wants that look. The gal is totally in control, not the other way round.

What does chet snicker have to say about this topic?

> East Asian gals consistently have the cutest legs.
Well sure if you like short short legs and very often disproportionately
long torsos.

Indians have longer legs and shorter bodies. And if they are like me,
they have long long legs. Oh yes they are thin chicken legs
for sure. But at 40, when everyone else is worried about thunder thighs,
my chicken legs remain, well, slim. Slim and shapely and long. What more can a girl
ask for.

Once I went brown I definitely stuck around, but as they say when I'm out on the corner hustlin' and flowin'...Game recognizes game. Beauty is beauty on any continent whether one prefers pale alebaster skin or a nice dark moca hue. Perhaps the hint of something different, something foreign and slightly exotic is appealing when occupying a foreign land. You get tired of tea and crumpets and want some dhosa and lassi for breakfast.

Although I did confirm something for my brother after he recently bedded a desi girl...and ladies I mean this with all due respect so please don't get offended. I assured him that despite her small but curvy frame, they were probably most definitely real and spectacular.

Holla back!

the chinee women are of shapeley foot and legge, but the hindoo woman is of a fine physique of childbearing. the negress is not a beauty but a sexual beast, nonetheless the female and the male negro are of robust health. for sexuel relations it is best to pursue the chinee.

am i right fellas? i mean am i right? come on guys!

am i right fellas? i mean am i right? come on guys!
Ouch.

Enjoyed the post, Vinod! Glad to know that despite the shortcomings, you're still a fan.

"You get tired of tea and crumpets and want some dhosa and lassi for breakfast."

Kind of ironic when you think of where they got the tea from in the first place.

The comments on this site are in general headed in the direction of discourse more suited for junior high.
Obsessive commenting about the color, looks, asses, breasts etc. etc. of desi females is getting a little tiresome.

The comments on this site are in general headed in the direction of discourse more suited for junior high. Obsessive commenting about the color, looks, asses, breasts etc. etc. of desi females is getting a little tiresome.

I think we desi mens are zimbly trying to make up for our small...confidence.

test

once you go round and brown, you never turn it down.

At the risk of being off-topic, let me just say that I met Niall Ferguson at a conference last monday. He looks very young, even though he must be in his forties. and oh, such airs! even snobs would call him a snob. Heavy oxbridge accent, takes himself way too seriously. Talking to him, you realize where the old stereotype about stuffy Brits comes from.

And talking about women, one of the first slides in his presentation at the conference talked about various commodities pre-1500 AD - Gold, Iron, etc... and fertile women!

:) I think you should qualify that as desi-women got back. I dont think there can ever be a conclusive study to state that our women are low on endowment factor. Our gods are good to us, so we should always be *smiling*.

Once I went brown I definitely stuck around, but as they say when I'm out on the corner hustlin' and flowin'...Game recognizes game. Beauty is beauty on any continent whether one prefers pale alebaster skin or a nice dark moca hue. Perhaps the hint of something different, something foreign and slightly exotic is appealing when occupying a foreign land. You get tired of tea and crumpets and want some dhosa and lassi for breakfast.

Although I did confirm something for my brother after he recently bedded a desi girl...and ladies I mean this with all due respect so please don't get offended. I assured him that despite her small but curvy frame, they were probably most definitely real and spectacular.

Holla back!

This comment is weird. A) most desi guys don't think of desi women as "something foreign and exotic" B) we generally don't think about "occupying foreign lands as a means to have sex with desi women, and C) contrary to popular belief I don't think either the BBC or your limited experience can vouch for the sexual characteristics of desi people.

Unless this was just a wild joke. Were you being tongue in cheek?

not to say desi men are not bastards. clearly they are.

Actually, I think the legs factor might also depend on the location. Not too many desis from the desh (even the 1.5 gen) have amazing legs, but OTOH, there seem to be a higher percentage of nice legs among abd's. Usually the rule, at least in my campus, - long legs and smaller torsos especially if one's ancestry is from the north.

Vinod & Amrita,

one specific internal difference between the Brits in India vs. elsewhere in the empire - they had a much higher tendency to “go native” - Until the first decades of the nineteenth century, the British in India had not the slightest notion of trying to Anglicize India and certainly not to Christianize it. On the contrary, it was the British themselves who often took pleasure in being orientalized. [Empire, pg 133]

William Dalrymple did a pretty thorough job on the late 18thC. to early 19th C. change of Prime Directive in White Mughals.

If you are interested in reading some further analysis of the matter, we recently had an extensive discussion on this very same topic on the British "Pickled Politics" blog here.

Anyone who thinks that Desi women are quiet or retiring should meet the women of my family - on both continents. We referred to my great-grandmother as "the martinet" for her short stature and commanding presence, and her eldest daughter as "the major-general." To say that these women were commanding is mild. Aunty Clytie died ten years ago and I'm still scared of her.

There is a possibility, though, that in my anglicised MangaloreBombayPoone family, women adopted some British behavioural characteristics. I've met many Indian women who are shy and retiring in public, but in the family home, are lionesses in charge of the manor. I'm not sure the stereotype of quiet women holds. . . at least not for Southies.

From what I have read (Jai, correct me if I'm wrong), the tendency to 'go native' was arrested when large numbees of British women started arriving in India during the later stages of the Raj. These women, from Victorian England, put a stop to casual socialising and mixing between desis and brits, and enforced rigid social segregation. Anyway, in my view (and I won't apologise for this even if I get a lot of flak) women are far bigger snobs than men ON AVERAGE...especially women from upper socioeconomic classes in India. This is based on observation, and not because I ever found myself on the receiving end of said snobbery. I wonder if this is a relic of attitudes learned from British women during the Raj, or is it a reflection of something older and deeper within Indian society?

I have to agree with #41 on this: I've got some terrifying aunts myself (from the south -- Tamil Nadu, Kerala -- I mean, good god, the demure-and-retiring desi girl stereotype SO does not fit Kerala women! It's a matriarchal society, people, and it shows!). And this isn't a criticism of said women at all -- I think they rock, and I try to emulate them in many ways. They speak their minds and they get things done, so more power to them.

And #42: you're not going to get flak from *me* for that observation :-) . I don't know if it's for cultural or historical or hormonal reasons that upper-caste women are generally far bigger snobs than their husbands. But I've noticed it myself, again without being the object of the snobbery -- and because of it I'm more comfortable in the company of the men than the women, which is difficult when you're a woman yourself and often expected to hang out with the women and do what they're doing. I'm curious to hear if anyone who agrees might have any theories on why this is so.

lemme just say that desi men - for whatever reason - almost always have a "pre-uncle" belly

Speak for your self buddy !!!!

Sahej

A few points of clarification. I'm white, my wife is desi (ABD Telugu), and my daughter well she's adorable.

I was simply trying to throw out one possible explanation for the British fascination while they were occupying India. Also I want attempting to support my theory that women in all colors from all parts of the world can be smoking hot. One simply has to find them.

I never gave a second thought about my wife being Indian when I initially asked her out. I simply thought she was cool girl with a nice body. The whole skin-religion-what-will-the-kids-look-like dicussions did not come until 3 2 years later. Things just clicked, we got along, dated for two years before telling her parents, yada yada we're married with a kid.

Sahej

The third part was intended as a joke and reference to a Seinfeld episode. With regards to personal experience, I am indeed somewhat limited with only an N = 2.

It's not just colonial men-desi women. My great-great-great grandfather had two wives in colonial India, and one of them was white. It caused a scandal in his Hindu family, but now all parties are quite friendly with each other, the whiteness having washed out, more or less, a generation or two ago. The "real" family was reportedly quite nasty to the "white" family, but he stood up for his half-breed children.

I'm not sure the stereotype of quiet women holds. . . at least not for Southies.

ditto for Marathi women... uh... Westies?
That's right, I disown the North.

Not a big deal Asha's dad. Without the clarification it just seems a little strange. Its all good man, sorry if I rankled you!

It's not just colonial men-desi women. My great-great-great grandfather had two wives in colonial India, and one of them was white. It caused a scandal in his Hindu family, but now all parties are quite friendly with each other, the whiteness having washed out, more or less, a generation or two ago. The "real" family was reportedly quite nasty to the "white" family, but he stood up for his half-breed children.

That's very interesting, is your family from an aristocratic/feudal background ? I ask because I know there was some interaction between English women & Indian men at that level of society. My interpretation of this is somewhat different from yours though, I think the nastiness has more to do with perceived illegitimacy than racism. It would have been the same situation if this patriarch had a second family with a Hindu of a different caste.

One possible explanation for :

they had a much higher tendency to “go native”

That's very interesting, is your family from an aristocratic/feudal background ?

No, definitely not...but most of my recent ancestors were employed by the British in some capacity--as lawyers, civil servants, police officers. They were rather westernized. You may be right about a second wife from a different Hindu caste getting the same treatment, but in South India there is a lot of derision towards Anglo Indians, who were thought of as being in a no-man's land of neither Anglo nor Indian, so I think there was some element of that at work as well.

"Once you go brown, your ass will go right back to black!" Is the responce I gave a black woman who wanted to date an indian guy. Black men are usually really attracted to indian women and now I know that a stead diet of red beans and chaal is the culprit.

in South India there is a lot of derision towards Anglo Indians, who were thought of as being in a no-man's land of neither Anglo nor Indian, so I think there was some element of that at work as well.

I'm not saying it's a fair assessment, but most Southies (I'm one too) are of the opinion that Anglo-Indians hold them in low regard. Perhaps this is a mistaken belief. To clarify, I am not talking about mixed race families post-Independence where it is typically a union of equals

Sahej - No problem, no offense taken. As my man Michael Scott would say "It's all gooouud."

I think I was more white than the horse I rode in on...He-oh! I'll be here all week, be sure to tip your waitress.

Desi (South Asian) girls were always attractive to foreigners. I cannot imagine what is so shocking about the matter that Europeans found them so attractive. The Moghuls found them attractive too. Some of the Moghul Queens were desi girls- aren’t they? If I am not wrong then I can say that sometimes Moghuls and Iranians got jealous of the influence of desi girls and their relatives in the royal court.
At this age, Bollywood actresses are attracting people from all over the world with their beauty and charm. India is a top contender for the Miss World and Miss Universe awards every year now.

Razib,

greek prostitutions would pad their asses.

hence the alternate references to Aphrodite as Callipygos.

but most Southies (I'm one too) are of the opinion that Anglo-Indians hold them in low regard.

I think it's a vicious circle--Anglo-Indians referred to England as "home" and set themselves apart from the rest of the colonized subcontinent, the other locals were resentful so decided to look down on them, thereby setting them apart even more etc. I'm not assigning blame to either side here, just attempting to explain the phenomenon. If the British didn't "go native" in the other colonies, I guess there's no equivalent community elsewhere in the world, but it would be interesting to hear about if there was.

tall boned, fair skinned, blue eyed, with blond hair, looking verily like the avatar of Shiva himself

but no mention of his unmentionable, was it greater than the BBC average?

I heart Yeti. And I hate this thread. That is all.

but no mention of his unmentionable, was it greater than the BBC average?

hence the alternate references to Aphrodite as Callipygos

If the British didn't "go native" in the other colonies, I guess there's no equivalent community elsewhere in the world, but it would be interesting to hear about if there was.

It's just one datapoint, but I seem to recall from Michael Ondaatje's biography that his Burgher parents regarded themselves as Tamil. The progenitor of the Ondaatje family was a Tamil healer brought to Colomobo from India in the 1500s to cure the colonial governor's wife of some illness. He was successful and was "rewarded" with conversion & marriage to a Portugese woman. Are there any Sri Lankans out there who can compare/contrast the Burgher & Anglo-Indian experiences ? Did the Dutch/Portguese/British in Sri Lanka also tend towards assimilation?

All because of protruding buttocks and other unmentionables

My protruding rondure is never unmentionable. Hail the callipygian! :D

Yeah like Shruti, what yeti said

I feel insulted. Neither is my derriere protruding (it is rather flat) and actually looks like a barrier reef. There is an abrupt flattening right around the posterior medulla oblongata and the mid rondurata. I am unable to compete with Ghee and Rice:-) Rondure nice word. Much better than Derriere...

Might the fact that India was as far away as you can get from England(to that point) play a role. It is quiet possible that these British men were not "going native" as much as taking care of their needs. If they wanted to go back to England in order to get laid, they might have had to wait a long... long time. The fact that Millions of them never had the good fortune of going back might be an other factor. Don't get me wrong sista's, but lets not sit here and relish in the idea of indian girls being endowed with a special place in the hearts of the british. The reality might have been as simple as British needing an outlet to express their energy and our ladies back home were happy to oblige.;-)

This thread is actually awesome, because its potentially completely without standard answers on any side. The meeting of East and West, man and woman, brown and white, beige and tan, black and seinna, west and south, and north and east, the flat butted and the roundured.

Totally seriously, this thread should be uncomfortable, but its also really real. Much potential for this thread I see. or not.

The turnip is right; the desi ass is flat. Sahej is even righter, refreshingly leaving the left behind. But Yeti (27) is the star. Cleverly using humour to defend the humourless.

Manju, it was your logic that got to me. I'm now a player for the dark side

But really, is true, it's tiresome to pretend that politics and sex go together. can anyone even count thet number of times people are f-cking the exact opposite person they are ideologically aligned with in every other situation? Thats what gets me about these kinds of issues, and why it'd be nice to have a thread where that's taken in consideration. nobody is really with the "appropriate person" but we all sit here and pretend like there's a way to control who we find sexuelly attractive

But Yeti (27) is the star. Cleverly using humour to defend the humourless.

No, my friend. You are the star. The war being waged by the Humorless has taken its toll... on all of us. Let's push out the jive... and breathe in the love.

can anyone even count thet number of times people are f-cking the exact opposite person they are ideologically aligned with in every other situation?

"Welcome to the wacky world of hypocrisy!"

You really believe its hypocrisy? Isn't it hypocrisy to pretend the act of being attracted to someone is politically chosen?

Love is the crooked thing. There is nobody wise enough to find out all that is in it. For he would be thinking of love till the stars had run away and the shadows eaten the moon. Ah, Yeti, brown Yeti, brown Yeti, one cannot begin it too soon.

I can't believe nobody has used the word 'kundi' yet.

KUNDI!!!

I like my men to be small-penised and to have a leg or two cut off in early childhood due to a land mine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attraction_to_disability

You really believe its hypocrisy? Isn't it hypocrisy to pretend the act of being attracted to someone is politically chosen?

Not going to get into this discussion too much, I think people tend to have strong opinions (I certainly do). I didn't say attraction is politically chosen. In this particular quote I meant that if your politics are important to you, and the person you're f***ing contradicts that entirely - for instance, if I'm rabidly anti-gun, and I'm boinking a card-carrying NRA member - yes, there's something hypocritical about it. If I'm a Klansman and my wife is Black, well, there's something hypocritical about both of us quite frankly.

I do believe attraction is far more complicated than just a magnetic force uncontrollably drawing people together. I don't think you can turn attraction on and off, but I do think you can reflect on who you're attracted to and why, because it DOES relate to your own personal psychology and it often has disturbing implications depending on who you are. And some people, once they realize why they're attracted to whoever the f*ck they're attracted to, are happy with it. Some people are dissatisfied with it. It depends on so many things. Principles and politics may be important in these situations.

And I CERTAINLY think you can, to some extent, choose who you pursue in terms of relationships, hook-ups, etcetera.

It is quiet possible that these British men were not "going native" as much as taking care of their needs. If they wanted to go back to England in order to get laid, they might have had to wait a long... long time.

Obviously. If the only women available were the colored native women, what choice did the white brits have? For this same reason european males mated with african and native american women in the americas. There are far, far more mestizos and mulattoes than there are anglo-indians. The mixed population of South Africa alone probably exceeds the number of anglo-indians.

In the wide open mating culture that the anglosphere is now, desis have by far the lowest rate of dating and intermarriage with whites. What does that say about desi sexual desirability?

Too many desis have this tendency to flatter themselves and wildly exaggerate their status in the world. Who else would preen like peacocks making outrageous claims like: "India Shining"; "India Everywhere"; "India is an IT Superpower"; "The 21st century is the Indian Century" etc, when the glaring facts on the ground are that India (and South Asia in general) is at or very near the bottom of the world in Human Development Indices.

but I like my women like Flo-Jo.

Like Yeti, Shruti and Red Snapper said, I hate this thread

Whatever kind of a body I prefer in a man, I will definitely NOT have anything to do with a man who goes around telling me and other women about what he desires in a woman.

This post is going the exact same way that other post about Miss UK went.
At the risk of pointlessly stating the expremely obvious - Guys, your sexual preferences are your private business, please do us all a favor and keep them to yourselves.

Granted, but its a personal decision and I think people are sometimes attracted to things that they otherwise disavow.

Small penises and amputations notwithstanding

Well he is right about the lower half. Desi legs are fugly.

Huh? I didn't get a chance to read all the comments, but I'm seriously surprised by this one! Alot of desi girls legs, that I've noticed, have been quite shapely and slender. I'm guessing it's genetic!

"I personally find the book fascinating, well written, thoroughly researched and, dare I say, a balanced portrait of the whys, hows, and modern effects of British colonialism - warts, accomplishments, and all."
...pull the other one. I had no idea irony ran this subtle on SM

Granted, but its a personal decision and I think people are sometimes attracted to things that they otherwise disavow.

I think that speaks to my point, more or less. You emphasize the "personal" aspect more than the "decision" aspect, perhaps? I'm not saying we need some kind of laws preventing people from being in hypocritical relationships, I think that's fucking horrible. But I do think there is absolutely nothing wrong with questioning and speculating and theorizing about why attraction happens, why people make the decisions they do.

Most people don't like their behavior contradicting their attitudes, so they'll usually change their attitudes to match their behavior. harder to do the other way around. but sometimes i think it's a good thing to do.

oh god, it's a Saturday night and the party's at SM. someone give me a call, we should all go have this argument over drinks.

If you are interested in reading some further analysis of the matter, we recently had an extensive discussion on this very same topic on the British "Pickled Politics" blog here.

Jai Singh,

I read Pickled Politics with interest, thanks, and what I'm still saying is all this talk of favorable temperament is more or less bogus, though talk of shape is in my opinion not entirely without merit. Like I said earlier, it's unquestionable, although not mentioned as probable cause in the excerpt that Vinod cited, that advanced ideas about shampoo, such as those Dean Mohamet brought to England, according to Pickled Politics, must have played a strong, if understandably unacknowledged, part in the way Englishmen who were exposed to 18th C Indian women, who doubtless practiced superior methods of bathing, developed a preference for them.

Haha. It is a Saturday night, but, what the hell.....

Thats why I think this topic is potentially one of the more useful to discuss. I honestly can't add much more at this point, but I am curious as to other people's opinions. My contribution is I guess that we don't take off the table the idea that attraction and sexuality are compartmentalized into appropriate and inappropriate arenas. I don't think you are saying that either. But there's also the risk of lapsing into platitudes about solidarity and doing the right thing, which never will get to what really vexes people about these issues. Anyway. Been watching a pretty good movie called Edge of America while writing. Its quite good, about Indians (but the kind who live on the Rez), so its not a total loss of a Saturday.

Much respect for the respectful tone

Amitabh said:

From what I have read (Jai, correct me if I'm wrong), the tendency to 'go native' was arrested when large numbers of British women started arriving in India during the later stages of the Raj. These women, from Victorian England, put a stop to casual socialising and mixing between desis and brits, and enforced rigid social segregation.

Right, I'm saying, no, once the shampooing technique was out, thanks to Dean M. and others of his ilk, shiploads of now marriageable Victorian womenfolk were shipped to Desh to capture the India-based income of their male compatriots and institute apartheidt. Yes, Amitabh, all full-time consumers of any color are snobs; it's a matter of this being the best method of jockeying for position without working, or at any rate without being economically active.

totally agree w/ comment 66

Who else would preen like peacocks making outrageous claims like: "India Shining"; "India Everywhere"; "India is an IT Superpower"

Either you've never lived in the US or never seen the 'greatest nation on earth' slogans all around.

the chinee women are of shapeley foot and legge, but the hindoo woman is of a fine physique of childbearing. the negress is not a beauty but a sexual beast, nonetheless the female and the male negro are of robust health. for sexuel relations it is best to pursue the chinee.

am i right fellas? i mean am i right? come on guys!

Either you've never lived in the US or never seen the 'greatest nation on earth' slogans all around.

dude, you're insulted, offended even. educate yourself! (*WINK*)

Amitabh,

From what I have read (Jai, correct me if I'm wrong), the tendency to 'go native' was arrested when large numbees of British women started arriving in India during the later stages of the Raj.

To the best of my knowledge that was indeed one of the major reasons, although not the only one, as discussed in that link I mentioned earlier. Legislation implemented by the East India Company to prevent "Indianisation" and intermarriage, growing Christian evangelism, the general rise of British imperial power globally, and the development of racist Victorian-era ideas all contributed to the shift in attitudes.

In that book Niall Ferguson defends the British Empire as a force for much that is good. However he conveniently ignores the fact that the supposed beneficiaries of all this goodness constitute the overwhelming proportion of the most impoverished people on the planet. Just look at the sorry per capita incomes and HDI of the non-white members of the British Commonwealth. India, Pakistan , Bangladesh, Nigeria together account for ~1.5 billion people or almost a quarter of humanity. The per capita incomes of all these hopelessly backward states falls below the poverty line as defined by the U.N.

The worst off people on the planet, with very few exceptions such as Singapore, Hongkong etc, are those non-whites who were once colonized by the British.

Doordarshan = Macacaroach?

for sexuel relations it is best to pursue the chinee.

Bedi's love interest, who is slated to be a Chinese-American woman, has not yet been cast.

Purva Bedi Is Cast as Lead in When Kiran Met Karen

yeti,

if I'm rabidly anti-gun, and I'm boinking a card-carrying NRA member - yes, there's something hypocritical about it. If I'm a Klansman and my wife is Black, well, there's something hypocritical about both of us quite frankly.

And I CERTAINLY think you can, to some extent, choose who you pursue in terms of relationships, hook-ups, etcetera.

I am beginning to very strongly agree with your original thesis:

the chinee women are of shapeley foot and legge, but the hindoo woman is of a fine physique of childbearing. the negress is not a beauty but a sexual beast, nonetheless the female and the male negro are of robust health. for sexuel relations it is best to pursue the chinee.

Was that a NOT joke in there? I guess Turnip went to the same joke coach that Borat went to...NOT!! Just kidding, I had to throw that one out there.

Who are these chinee women people keep talking about? Do they resemble Chinese women?

the chinee women are of shapeley foot and legge, but the hindoo woman is of a fine physique of childbearing. the negress is not a beauty but a sexual beast, nonetheless the female and the male negro are of robust health. for sexuel relations it is best to pursue the chinee.

Ah yes Yeti, my dear old fruity,

You know, your hypothesis reminded me of a conversation I was having the other day with Umrao Bibi at the local courtesans’ abode.

“Umrao Bibi,” I said, flashing her my most dashing Cary Grantesque smile, “Is it true what they say about the Hindoostanee laydee, that most exotic and alluring of the female species ?”

I noticed her bridle momentarily at my use of the word “exotic”, but she appeared to swallow her indignation and moved on.

“And what exactly do ‘they’ say about us in the hallowed coffee shoppes of Old London Towne ?” she asked, waving an exotically hennaed hand in the air like the Kojakish actor Feroz Khan during one of his frequent philosophical musings.

I spat the remnants of my paan into my bearer’s waiting open palm, and began to twirl one side of my moustache as I spoke. “They say that the exotic Hindoostanee begum provides the best of all worlds: shy and demure in public, like a zebra about to be shot by a good colonial fellow on safari, but wild and unrestrained in the boudoir, like a tigress hungrily devouring its prey in the jungle after a long period of hunting, sniffing and snogging.”

“I will overlook that blatant piece of Orientalist exotificationalizationistic generalisation”, she purred, her eyes flashing with anger like Kali about to sacrifice one of her minions, “because every woman is like a jewel, regardless of where she originates – unique, with her own individual allure and her own distinct qualities and virtues. But in any case, you should know the answer better than anyone, due to your infamous gentlemanly carousings from Bombay to Madras to Calcutta to Lahore.”

I was absolutely mortified.

“Me ? The 25th Earl of Leicestershire ? With my reputation ?”

*smirks and raises one eyebrow*

Tally-ho.....

wow. can't believe more wasn't said about this. In addition, speaking post-colonially, I find it mind-blowing that no one picked up on the comment made by a brit staying in india who found fear in facing the growing feminism in euro women at the time. lastly, i totally and utterly agree with th eindividuals who find the h.s. type disturbing comments about what exactly makes us desi women hot and how we as a race must be genetically more attractive or something. the whole thing smacks of patriarchy

Bidi,

I think the main onus for responding to this is on desi females, since if desi males are the ones carrying that torch, that smacks of patronizing behavior. I mean that sincerely. Although a certain belief can be registered by a desi male on this topic, if desi women find this line of thinking disturbing, should not they challenge it. Otherwise, its just dudes fighting other dudes, same old thing.

To #100:

Coming from the South, if there was a Klansman married to a black woman, more than likely the Klan will lynch him.

Who are these chinee women people keep talking about? Do they resemble Chinese women?

Hindi Chini Behen Behen for China-India Friendship Year 2006, only few days of celebration activities and programs remain!

In the wide open mating culture that the anglosphere is now, desis have by far the lowest rate of dating and intermarriage with whites. What does that say about desi sexual desirability?

It might say that desis prefer other desis you racist ignorant prick.

#103 was a response to Doordarshan (#79).

one has to separate ideology from personal behaviour. i mean, socrates was knocking off little boys while trying to define the ideal state and "Justice"!!! does that mean I reject all Socrates has to offer because of his personal preference which I dont agree with? I think it is unfair to hurl the epithet hypocrisy at someone just because of inconsistencies in personal ways of life.

I think that's actually the definition of hypocrisy. Also, Socrates wasn't telling people not to boff little boys, then turning around and doing it himself. I may think Greek culture was problematic because of the pedophilic aspect of it, but I can't necessarily say that his ideas were hypocritical.

I don't think hypocrisy is such a bad word. I think we get really uncomfortable with it because honesty scares us, but I think hypocrisy is part of the human condition and part of the struggle of being alive. Coming to terms with your own contradictions is part of developing some maturity. People shouldn't be so afraid to confront the inconsistencies between their beliefs and their actions.

I respect someone who is, for instance, honest about their racist or oppressive beliefs far more than I do some liberal who pretends to be anti-everything and yet is completely subtly racist, sexist, etcetera. I try to be honest with myself about this shit and it's hard, but it doesn't mean you don't struggle to do so.

I refuse to comment on the topic of this thread, but I couldn't let this question remain a rhetorical one:

Although a certain belief can be registered by a desi male on this topic, if desi women find this line of thinking disturbing, should not they challenge it. Otherwise, its just dudes fighting other dudes, same old thing.

Aye, the women must be too stupid to be concerned.

...Sahej, it's a fine line that women walk in defending themselves. There are lots of strong and informed female voices on this blog - even MD, our resident woman Republican, has a strong femmy streak to her. You think it's a random coincidence that women just stop commenting when men start racializing and judging women's bodies down to the nitty gritty?

I acknowledge that it's a different atmosphere when the discussion is lighthearted and funny - or, even if they are serious, men are humble and allow room for women - but on this thread, the male opinions of women's bodies are definitive and in seriousness. Previous threads have ended up sounding just like this one, and you're usually the one to stop and posit the same "Hey guys, where are the women in all this talk of women? Why don't they care?" question. The answer, in my opinion: there's really nothing that women can say about these topics after it becomes apparent that you guys have already made up your minds, and/or don't really care to formulate a decision on women based on what women say.

"Desi women have nice breasts"... "Desi women have flat butts"... "Desi women are sexually undesirable"... I would never want to inhibit anyone from expressing an opinion, but when you put your words like that, what is there for desi women to say? They can object by saying it's not true, but what difference would that make to you if you've already made up your mind? If a woman objects by pointing to her own body, then it's more like pointing out that she is the exception to the general rule that you guys have established, and that doesn't help either party. Lastly, it's bad enough that you guys are having a discussion like this, but it would be even worse if I got indignant and started head-hunting for men - the classical hysterical woman (Antigone, Medea, Kali...) that men LOVE to see women be reduced to, because then they can say, "See, she's fucking crazy".

So, basically, this thread isn't the place for women to speak. What backs them into the corner even more is that no matter what a woman says, there's no good way to come out of a discussion like this without being taken for a) humorless, b) battleaxe or c) humorless battleaxe. Oh yeah, there's also d) clueless and unintentional misogyny apologist and e) asshole colluder. Even if I had said what Yeti said in #27, as brilliantly succinct as it was, it would have been taken for angry feministing - clever, perhaps, but still a battleaxe move. I'm surprised some women are still engaging (really y'all, save your efforts for a more humble and welcoming discussion).

Again, it's different when it's just fun and games, but if you want to be real about it (as it seems y'all are trying to be here) there's really nothing that a woman can say about this shit that hasn't already been said many times on this blog. So if you don't get it, you just don't fucking get it.

Therefore, gentlemen, please resume congratulating each other on your mental masturbation. I suspect that, like me, the other women reading this thread simply laughed at it as soon as they got over the initial indignation.

Peace,
Humorless Battleaxe

P.S. I know there are women who wouldn't agree with me on this, but remember that I don't claim to speak for all women. What I'm saying is just my guess based on how I see things. I'm also not picking on anyone in particular, just speaking about discussions like this in general. Just so you know, I do appreciate that you asked that question... and I almost always enjoy Yeti's logic :)

beshbesh = Razib?

I totally support Shruti's and suma's words.

#107, no way!

Aye, the women must be too stupid to be concerned.

Do you think this is why I said what I did? If so, why say this and then write a explanation of what you think? My only point is that, in response to the above, my explanation was, its not for men to comment over-long on this topic, in my opinion. If women or some women, or a woman wants to comment so be it. I personally don't like to hear guys call desi women exotic, or brown sugar, or to wax long on supposed attributes. Nor it is pleasent to hear it said about Asian women, or any other group. But its not on me to respond to it, and that's my only point. If you as a woman do or do not want to respond, that's your call

...Sahej, it's a fine line that women walk in defending themselves. There are lots of strong and informed female voices on this blog - even MD, our resident woman Republican, has a strong femmy streak to her. You think it's a random coincidence that women just stop commenting when men start racializing and judging women's bodies down to the nitty gritty?

Except that, this is not just a problem for a blog thread. And my point is thats its not on desi men to be responding to this stuff, because its too wrapped up in cock-fights. And also, on the Miss UK thread, it was women judging down to the nitty gritty too. Desi men just need to take a cue from desi women about how they respond to this stuff. I will say it bothers me and there are times I feel like, why the f won't somebody say something about lame-ass comments. At one point it would make me a little upset to see people just say nothing in response, but I did learn a long time ago a lot of what you are saying above. If you don't think this thread is the right place, that is cool. But, someone did wonder why more people were not responding, and I answered that person. If you read above I did register my feelings, but its not on me to get into some long discussion about it. Any thread can be changed in tone by enough people who want to change it, and with support. Course if you think this thread is silly and not worth it, that's your call again.

Aye, the women must be too stupid to be concerned.

Do you think this is why I said what I did?

No, not necessarily.

If so, why say this and then write a explanation of what you think?

To be rhetorical. (Just so we're clear, my comment was not a response to the topic at all. It was an observation on the nature of the comments on threads like this.) My comment was also intended to cover all the bases, just in case someone did think women must be too stupid to be concerned. Replace stupid for apathetic or misinformed or anything that someone could come up with to rationalize why women aren't being more vocal.

But its not on me to respond to it, and that's my only point. If you as a woman do or do not want to respond, that's your call

You were wondering why more women weren't speaking up, and I was explaining to you that this whole setup makes it pointless for women to respond at all.

Course if you think this thread is silly and not worth it, that's your call again.

Way ahead of you, buddy :)

I'm out - peace.

Opening up a conversation with a random insult.....interesting.

And if nothing else, this conversation between me and you has stopped the racialized objectification at least for the last few comments.

If nothing else, anyone who comments on the thread is going to see that a discussion was had on this topic. I'd consider the tone of this thread has at least momentarily changed to one that at least problematizes racialized objectification.

I think that's actually the definition of hypocrisy.

if I'm rabidly anti-gun, and I'm boinking a card-carrying NRA member - yes, there's something hypocritical about it.

I respect someone who is, for instance, honest about their racist or oppressive beliefs far more than I do some liberal who pretends to be anti-everything and yet is completely subtly racist, sexist, etcetera.

r.e. #106

Shrutiji,

Your words are an oasis in this desert of a thread. Shabash and thank you.

Your words are an oasis in this desert of a thread. Shabash and thank you.

"Desi women have flat butts"...

The flat butts evolved to accommodate the short desi penises. Or more likely, it was a simultaneous evolution.

Seriously, there does seem to be a racial correlation between protrusion of the female bum and the length of the corresponding male sexual organ. The bigger the gluteus maximus the longer the shaft required to enter the target. Thus the big african butts and long schlongs.

Speaking of which, that picture of Madhuri Dixit appears to be a coy invitation to rear entry. :)

It might say that desis prefer other desis

Except for the fact thats not true. Given the chance, desi men and women would choose mates from west of the Indus. As proved by the constant drooling over western and persian (and persian-looking) women and men by posters in this very forum.

Please REFRAIN from using multiple handles on the same thread. Thank you.

Shankar, great post, dude! Bravo!

Either you've never lived in the US or never seen the 'greatest nation on earth' slogans all around.

A false tu quoque. There is no comparison whatsoever. The US actually is a superpower. India, on the other hand, is neither "shining" nor an "IT Superpower". A tiny 2% share of the global IT business, and that too doing grunt work for american corporations, does not an IT Superpower make.

Even little Finland (population ~5 million) has a far better claim than India (population >1000 million) to the title. The Finns have given the world one of its major computer operating systems (Linux), and they dominate the cellular phone business (Nokia). Nothing original or world-shaking has come out of India, despite its vaunted hordes of "english-proficient" programmers and engineers.

And in case you didnt know Indians, including IIT graduates, also perform very poorly in international coding competitions.

Since he quit archival work, his histories have suffered; they tend to sprawl out of control, and hunt down evidence to support his guiding theories.

Why haven't those dusty archives been digitized and made available to the internet masses yet?

And in case you didnt know Indians, including IIT graduates, also perform very poorly in international coding competitions.

The US doesn't do too well either. The last time a US university won the ACM Intercollegiate programming contest was around 10 years ago ( link ). Generally China and Russia dominate, the primary reason being that colleges in these countries strongly focus on these tests and prepare their students for a year or more. This is not to detract from the obvious ability of the students who win, but in all tests, focus and preparation are at least as important as talent and general ability.

I take it back. Why participate in a thread that's structurally unfair. I see Shruti's point. Many thanks for being kind enough to explain it to someone who is still apparently in need of learning (educating myself!)

Sorry to see you go, Sahej. The dark side's not for everyone. Plus, when the market collapses, and the strip clubs close, and the whisky runs dry; it can get quite lonely.

But rest assured, sex and power and violence will always be deeply entwined. When the project to emancipate your libido from all that is structurally unfair proves just as futile as the one currently trying to cure homosexuality; there will be a spot at the bar reserved for you, at the corner of Wall and Broad.

Till then, my friend, I'll spin some Brown Sugar in your honor.

Doordarshan,

you insult and offend me! educate myself! black!

a note to all the small-pricked low IQ black-faced world-hated-by south asians out there (who have inferior in every way to every race), remember to poke a little fun macacaroach, oops, Doordarshan. he, unlike we, is at peace with his micropenis and is spreading the gospel far and wide of black indian inferiority.

and remember let him "educate you." his insults are the height of wisdom which even the rishis and gurus of yore could not attain.

replace in the above, one person and her daughter. does that still make the woman hypocritical to love her daughter even if ideologies differ? can we control the thoughts of those close to us?

take the above for example. one person and his mailman. does it still make the mailman hypocritical for delivering the mail even if ideologies differ?

you don't choose your kids. you also don't choose your family. you do choose your partners (usually in this society). I think that makes a difference. I really don't think people who get together just land on top of each other and are magically bonded through some sort of genitally-mounted electromagnetic force. I think we all make choices.

I'm not saying it's not complicated - we all live these contradictions to some extent. it's about what we value most. some values can be contradicted. some can't. i'm not going to be friends with someone who abuses children or partners. i'm not going to be best buddies with a virulent racist. and I make some other choices as well.

you definitely can't just swap out one relationship for another. each one has their own complexity. to some extent anyone who is unhappy with the current system is a hypocrite for not engaging in forceful insurrection of some sort. so? we live with it and deal with it. then we die.

Still, I offer humble apologies and a convivial drink at the next meetup for those who walked away offended. And now, we return to our regularly scheduled lives…

Hey Vinod, just so you know, I don't think it was offensive of you to put this post up, I really wasn't commenting on the fact that you posted it or critiquing your motivations. I just reacted to the material. So no need to apologize to me. Although one day I will take you up on that drink.

The US doesn't do too well either. The last time a US university won the ACM Intercollegiate programming contest was around 10 years ago ( link )

Another false to quoque.

The US won the top spot every year from 1977 to 1989. From 1990 to 1997 it won the contest 4 times. From 1998 to 2006 it had 15 contestants in the top ten, including 2 second place finishes. You call that not doing too well?

India's vaunted IITians on the other hand don't even crack the top twenty. Surprisingly, Bangladesh usually does way better than India. It came very close to making the top ten once (11th place).

China is definitely coming on strong in recent years. It also dominates the Math Olympiad. Even Iran won the Math Olympiad once. India never.

Another false to quoque.

The US won the top spot every year from 1977 to 1989. From 1990 to 1997 it won the contest 4 times. From 1998 to 2006 it had 15 contestants in the top ten, including 2 second place finishes. You call that not doing too well?

India's vaunted IITians on the other hand don't even crack the top twenty. Surprisingly, Bangladesh usually does way better than India. It came very close to making the top ten once (11th place).

China is definitely coming on strong in recent years. It also dominates the Math Olympiad. Even Iran won the Math Olympiad once. India never.

I was not trying a to quoque. All I wanted to point out was that programming contests are not like the Nobel Prize(or maybe in this case the Turing award) which everyone is trying equally hard for. They are contests between between 18 year olds. Who wins has a lot to do with who takes it seriously. Are you going to argue now that Saratov State is stronger at computer engineering than MIT, because they won and MIT lost? IMO the best colleges across the world can be equally competitive at a contest like this: the question being who is willing to invest the most time and resources.

As for India never winning the math olympiad, I am not sure what you want people on this blog to do about it. Should we get together and write you a letter of apology? If you have a problem with the attitude of a few desis, you should address them personally in your comments and point out your issues. Blanket statements like 'too many desis are x' are the marks of a troll.

Of course Brit colonial men would be enchanted by the Indian women they slept with, because there's every chance they were professionals. What daughters of decent families would run off and consort with a visiting Brit soldier? You can't compare apples and oranges, our dear little soldiers probably weren't visiting the brothels much back home but assuming their money went further and the lack of a strong English community in the early decades of colonisation removed some inhibitions, they probably lived it up with the tawaifs.

And Vinod, your post was tongue in cheek till it got to the comment about desi women's asses. Forgive us for being a bit touchy when we've grown up with desi men who see fit to pass judgement on the most minute aspects of a woman's appearance when they are bald and paunchy (and presumably small-dicked) themselves.

sakshi, why respond to the bait? you know what it is!

It might say that desis prefer other desis

.....frequently due to having similar cultural reference points and an understanding of "what it's like" for the other party. And let's also not forget that a hell of a lot of desi parents in the West throw up huge obstacles to the notion of their sons & daughters marrying someone from a different background. Both of these points are certainly major reasons behind why the majority of British desis end up married to someone from a similar background, for example, despite the fact that we don't exactly have problems attracting white people here in the UK.

Given the chance, desi men and women would choose mates from west of the Indus. As proved by the constant drooling over western and persian (and persian-looking) women and men by posters in this very forum.

Jeeeaaloussss ? It's amusing how irate some people can become in this matter if they have major problems attracting partners from the above groups. And by "some people", I mean the kind regularly frequenting SM under different usernames and advocating "education" in response to being "offended, insulted even".

Shruti,

the classical hysterical woman (Antigone, Medea, Kali...) that men LOVE to see women be reduced to,

A brief, quiet word in your ear.

Your objections to men making generalisations about women are justified; however, for your part it would be better not to make similar sweeping statements about men such as the one quoted above. "Some men" would have been more accurate. Otherwise you risk a) making the same mistake that you are accusing men of, and b) you risk alienating well-meaning men here who would otherwise support your stance.

I doubt you would react positively to a male commenter here saying something like "the castrated, emasculated, doormat man that women LOVE to see men be reduced to", for example.

Another false to quoque.

Hey, I got ya quoque right here pal.

Yeti @131 : I am in full agreement!

Vinod, thanks for a nice update. My sincere apologies to anyone who may have been upset. That includes Vinod, of course. Let's all take that chill pill and smoke that peace pipe. Life is short.

Peace out.

Vinod: I think you misunderstand. My comments here are littered with the words "thread" and "discussion" precisely to avoid putting the blame on you and your post. If I had a problem with you I'd have emailed you, and if I had a problem with your post I would have had the courtesy to address it straightforwardly and respectfully.

India's vaunted IITians on the other hand don't even crack the top twenty.

I think some IITians are not experts at open heart surgery. And we call them the *best* ? thoooo...Do you know how few IITians have published novels? Shame.

sakshi, why respond to the bait? you know what it is!

Yeah. Should have known better.

Vinod,

I did not mistake your quoting of Ferguson as your own endorsement of anything he said. My objection is solely to your "Flo-jo" comment. I don't know whether you think desi women's lower halves are beautiful or ugly. The thing is - I don't want to know. What is offensive is that it's considered OK to say these in a forum where women are present.

I want to point out that I'm certainly not singling you out. This just spilled over from over two weeks of comments of this type. Others (Abhi, I'm looking at you too :-)) and certainly a lot of commenters are out there saying "This is what I like in a woman's body" *without being asked*. As if the media giving us these indirect messages of what is hot weren't enough.

Just to be clear - I think it's equally bad if women say it.

Respect and peace.

ps: I otherwise very much like your posts and really appreciate that you keep some ideological balance on SM.

Blog personae are just blog personae and I don't feel like defending my manhood by continuing to argue on a blog

Blog personae are just blog personae and I don't feel like defending my manhood by continuing to argue on a blog

sorry sahej, shouldn't had said "your libido" when i was only discussing libido in a very abstract and over-the-top way. for what it's worth, your position is probably the braver, as i'm only defending the status quo (which is, of course, a product of nature...but i digress again) and you've risked the wrath of not only misogynists like me but also 2nd and 3rd wave feminists.

these water aren't easy to navigate, but i'm sure you could teach colonel jai and i some tricks.

Blog personae are just blog personae

Tru Dat. It's not like I'm out every night drinking whisky in strip bars...sometimes I order a Martini.

Manju,

There's no hard feelings and it was more than a little funny. Its not guts so much as repetitive stupidity, but what the hell

An account I read a while ago indicated that in the pre-1857 days, there was indeed a fair amount of socializing between the British "white knights" and Desi women on the Subcontinent. Not to say that relations were uniformly or even predominantly cordial-- in Bengal at least, which had suffered about 10 million people killed after the East India Company went mega-mercantilist on the region in the late 1700's, any association with the Company was, shall we say, unconducive to gettin' it on. Most of the Anglo "going native" stories I've encountered were in other parts of India with the roaring 1820's and 1830's in particular, as the major periods in which mixin' it up took place.

OTOH, after 1857 and the Indian rebellion, the party was pretty much over. It wasn't just that Englishwomen were being brought in (this had been occurring in the prior decades too)-- it's just that after the spectacle of Brits hanging villagers from trees and blowing apart Brahmins strapped to cannons after the Rebellion was put down, it was a little difficult for the colonialists and those inferior dark-skinned hordes under them to associate in such a way anymore.

It's interesting that Niall Ferguson is mentioned here, since he (and other imperial apologists of late) really do tend to downplay the unbelievably sanguinary ultraviolence of the Raj. The British committed atrocities in India after 1857 that rival anything the Gestapo or the Bolsheviks committed later, and in terms of sheer numbers killed the British in India alone, if anything exceed them.

Amartya Sen wasn't kidding-- those famines in late 1800's that killed 32+ million folks in India, had British intentions written all over them. In the British work camps, Indian work rations were less than what the Nazis allowed for in the concentration camps (Mike Davis wasn't the first to point this out). The prison facilities on Andaman Island were essentially death camps. And even as Indian mothers and children were shrivelling up and dying slowly and painfully on the streets of Madras, the British were shipping food out of India, taxing us (literally) to death, even imposing price controls at the farmer's markets.

All of this was occurring of course, even as the British were just about wiping out the native populations of Australia, Tasmania and New Zealand (putting a bounty on the head of the natives tends to do that), tossing Boer women and kids into concentration camps that killed 30,000, committing their latest atrocities in Ireland, working Africans to death in the sub-Saharan diamond mines, later terror-bombing people in Somalia and Iraq. Even outside of their Empire, in e.g. China (which was never colonized and where the troops actually did manage to beat up on the Brits, French and Americans in some lesser-known engagements after 1842 and 1860), the British caused a royal mess-- forcing Indian opium onto the Chinese people while burning down the beautiful imperial Summer Palace in the Opium Wars. The Victorians and their successors were a murderous, genocidal bunch. It's no accident that the word "loot" is of Hindi origin.

That's why I've long found it rather odd to argue that India was fortunate for having the British rather than the Nazis as rulers-- for a very large section of Britain's history in India, the Brits were more vicious and bloodthirsty than even the worst of the 20th-century dictators. And in 1930's Germany at least, there was no democracy and free press after Hitler took power (and he never won anything close to a majority vote, as is sometimes falsely claimed-- he manipulated Parliamentary politics after getting only a minority of the votes) and it's unclear how much the people as a whole knew about the worst of the atrocities, plus Germany at the time was acting from a position of relative poverty and political weakness (Germany was only the most minor of colonial powers) and, even with all this being said, modern Germans very much abhor their country's prior imperialistic and warlike acts in the 20th century.

Whereas the Brits in the 19th century committed their genocides and atrocities during a period when the people had some form of representative government and a good deal of prosperity, and even today, British folks like Niall Ferguson try to make excuses for what was a viciously genocidal and violent enterprise, that utterly wrecked the industries, economies and agriculture of India, among other places. In fact, the countries in the 19th century that made out best were the ones who defeated the British in battle-- the Afghans, the South Americans (Brits got a nasty comeuppance around the Rio de Plata around 1804 or so), the Egyptians (Mohammed Ali), even the Haitians who defeated a British invasion in 1793 and were among the wealthier of the former colonies (though French and later American meddling there didn't help matters). (Afghanistan was a surprisingly wealthy and culturally rich place in the 19th century, despite having truly crummy geography.)

In the 20th century of course, it's notable that most colonies decolonized very much unlike India, i.e. with very violent struggle and defeat of the British in war, and that they later advanced economically and politically only after they'd tossed off the British yoke-- Ireland in 1921 (Anglo-Irish War), Egypt, Israel, Cyprus and Aden after WWII.

This crap about the British as "civilizers" has always been little more than a bunch of carefully propagated lies. It's a damn shame that Britain still has apologists trying to tell them.